I was thinking of this and wondering how others see it in their judgements? Are the derived houses considered more important or the radical houses when looking for testimonies? Does the radical chart only show the perception of the querent and how they view the matter while the turned houses show how the actual reality of the matter ? Like i remember reading in a horary textbook (by Frawley may be?) where he says that the aspect between a sick old man ( quesited ) and the radical 8th house ruler wont kill him but the aspect between his turned 8th certainly has that power. But i also remember some astrologers giving more importance to the radical chart. They dont just view the radical placements as the perspective of the querent but they view it as the *actual* objective reality. (Hope im making sense) . So what is the general consensus like?

Am not a scholar..but I am of the early school that reverences the natural placements 1st with the visiting planets/signs giving additional testimony, statements to these houses/signs and their ambassadors as they go to different kingdoms to visit. Should like to know the text that speaks about the turned chart (signs/houses) of the old man will kill him, where the rightful authorships of said rulings will speak for the sake about the situation of the old man ..rather.

It seems to me if Mars-1st,physical, Sun individual 5th life giver, 10th Saturn length of days reaper, 6th health sickness or 8th Pluto/Mars-transformation energy all got together to reveal their relationships (aspects/domain-sign) between themselves about that old man..that should be enough?

Example: Mercury (Virgo 6th health) receives an aspect from Moon of Cancer residing upon the physical 1st house (condition is sour stomach). What is the cause of the sour stomach is 'where' Moon lists, (depositor), what sign is upon the 4th house (aids to describe a reason as foundation for the ailment, liquid absorption?), where is Moon's (what house) depositor, how is he positioned, will he serve as aid, revealed by aspect relationship (the depositors lord). She/He will add to the Moon the culpability to speak of symptom to aid or diminish?

Conditions, attitudes and right place or design must be seen as foundation 1st I should think, but then again, I am not a scholar as said. Only a student whom has seen the lords upon their true thrones achieve their purpose-with 2nd testimony's of qualifications (visiting lords/signs) aiding their discerning capabilities.

Hope I make sense also
Vyri_________________"Omnia Numeris In Sita Sunt"
"Everything is veiled in number"
"Ye Stars which are the glory of Heaven!"
If in your bright leaves we would read the fate of men and empires, "tis to be forgiven"-Lord Byron

Derivative houses, where treating a particular house under scrutiny as the ascendant is much overused. This “turning the wheel” is often done by the astrologer when a querent asks about another person or when a question is asked on behalf of another.

It’s very common in horary to get overzealous about turning the wheel without first giving the radical figure enough thoughtful consideration of the factors involved in the quesited. This is a common mistake by learners and over-read armchair astrologers bloated with un-digested knowledge. Overuse of this technique leads to a lot of wrong predictions. The technique by and large does not give consistent or accurate results and should only be used with great caution.

I really can’t stress this enough, a radical chart, that is, one that can be interpreted with sound judgment reflects the substance of the quesited...Always. There are times in horary that events have not advanced far enough for a clear answer, or the Querent and/or quesited was insincere or frivolous. The astrologer should always be aware of this. A radical chart does not need to be forced to arrive at a judgement in most cases.

Here is an example, a client comes to you and presents a question about the health of their father. Father is signified by the fourth house. Many practitioners would immediately turn the wheel of the chart and treat the fourth house as the ascendant and look to the sixth house from the fourth, or the ninth for the father's health.

In the example above, the quesited about the health of the father should be seen from the influences on the fourth and its lord and planets placed therein or in configurations with them. In other words, the horary chart should have a fairly clear symbolic relationship to the question (the quesited). The significator, lord of the fourth in a house of sorrow (sixth, eighth or twelfth), weak and/or afflicted would immediately pose a concern for the quesited. The Sun, the natural significator for father should be considered in this context as well.

Another example, for questions about the mother, the condition of the tenth house and the Moon would need to be examined. Not the seventh.

Note that in some cases the fourth and the tenth for each parent can switch, think of the fourth and tenth being able to represent "a parent."

If the family relation is not signified by any of the traditional house significations look to the significations of the planets to find the correct relation. If a needed relation is not available in the list of significations of houses or planets, the seventh house lord can then be considered.

Another point to consider is if you are doing a horary to answer your own father's query, your father is the querent and is signified by the ascendant and its Lord, not the fourth or seventh.

I am grateful to you both for sharing your knowledge so generously. Thanks for elucidating so clearly with examples. So going by what both of you have suggested, the radical chart alone can clearly show the matter being asked about. Vryi, I remember now I had read this point about the derivative houses being more important in one of the Skyscript articles written by Frawley. I will post the link to it after checking it soon.

Indeed if the horary chart is the chart of birth of a specific questions then it is logical that the chart with its radical houses themselves should describe the matter and answer the question. But as AJ says most newbies fall into this easy habit of quickly looking at the derived houses to jump to a judgement (I'm guilty of the same)
Thank you once again for taking time out to reply.

So apologies for any confusion.
But here Frawley only writes that an antiscion aspect between the quesited and the radical 8th house lord wont have the power to kill. So he's just talking about the antiscion and not passing judgements about the radical Lord of the 8th not having that power by Ptolemaic aspects.

However this thing about whether the radical or the derivative houses are more significant in showing testimonies to a chart is an issue which had been bothering me for some time now after coming across a chart which seemed to say one thing looking at the radical houses and something entirely different when considering the turned houses. Generally though I try to synthesize and look at the "whole" picture

I think it really depends what you're asking about. If the question concerns "my son's money" I have no problem looking at the 2nd from the 5th house, or radix 6th house. Things get a little crazy when we ask about "my son's friend's money." 11th from the 5th = radix third house, then his money is second from the 3rd, or 4th house. Especially asking about "my ex's new wife," 7th from the 7th or first house, which would also be the house of the querent. Ditto on grandparents.

At some point, the chart should give a picture or tell a story of the question and its situation. Whether it does so better with a turned or radix chart depends upon the chart and the question.

Contact Deborah Houlding
| terms and conditions
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated